DEALS

Tom Jackson's baseball card - if he had one - would report he throws left, writes right. In his columns and blog, "The Right Stuff," southpaw Jackson provides insight into the evolving human condition from a distinctly conservative point of view.

We’ve all heard that while facts are facts, opinions are like an orifice in the body’s nether region: Everybody has one. And, by extension, no one’s is more worthwhile than another’s.

Such dismissiveness has found purchase in (especially) public schools, much to the lament of Justin P. McBrayer, a professor of philosophy who only recently discovered that the phenomenon was being taught in elementary schools when, at his son’s second-grade open house, he stumbled upon two troubling signs:

Fact: Something that is true about a subject and can be tested or proven.

The emerging nuclear deal with Iran is indefensible. The White House knows it. That is why President Obama does not want to subject an agreement to congressional approval, why critics of the deal are dismissed as warmongers, and why the president, his secretary of state, and his national-security adviser have spent several weeks demonizing the prime minister of Israel for having the temerity to accept an invitation by the U.S. Congress to deliver a speech on a subject of existential import for his small country. These tactics distract public attention. They turn a subject of enormous significance to American foreign policy into a petty personal drama. They prevent us from discussing what America is about to give away.

Tom Jackson’s “The Right Stuff” blog updates throughout the week at TBO.com.

Anybody who thinks we know everything worth knowing about what went down in the Benghazi attack that left four Americans dead, including an ambassador, either is kidding himself or finds convenient comfort in the embrace of deniability.

Well, good luck with all that, because Judicial Watch’s insatiable curiosity, determination and expertise with Freedom Of Information Act forms struck fresh gold this month: Half a world away from the chaotic, degenerating conditions at the U.S. consulate on Sept. 11, 2012, State Department officials including top aides to then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton “knew from the outset,” says Judicial Watch, “that the Benghazi mission compound was under attack by armed assailants tied to a terrorist group.”

Anybody who thinks we know everything worth knowing about what went down in the Benghazi attack that left four Americans dead, including an ambassador, either is kidding himself or finds convenient comfort in the embrace of deniability.

Well, good luck with both of those, because Judicial Watch’s insatiable curiosity, determination and expertise with Freedom Of Information Act forms struck fresh gold this month: Half a world away from the chaotic, degenerating conditions at the U.S. consulate on Sept. 11, 2012, State Department officials — up to and including top aides to then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton — “knew from the outset,” says the Judicial Watch account, “that the Benghazi mission compound was under attack by armed assailants tied to a terrorist group.”

The subject line of an email received some 90 minutes left no doubt: “Ansar al-Sharia Claims Responsibility for Benghazi Attack.”

With an unceremonious sweep of his trusty Cross Townsend rollerball Tuesday, President Obama made good on an old promise. No, not that one. You still can’t keep your plan, or your doctor. This one: He vetoed a bill authorizing commencement of the Keystone XL pipeline, which would link to a network in Nebraska to bring crude oil from Canadian tar sands to refineries along the Gulf Coast.

The explanation was a howler: “[T]his act of Congress ... cuts short thorough consideration of issues that could bear on our national interest — including our security, safety, and environment.” Executive agencies have been reviewing Keystone more than six years. It’s been endorsed five times by the State Department.

For months after she was abducted in August 2013, the family of Prescott, Ariz., aid worker Kayla Mueller was in routine contact with her ISIS kidnappers, who gave every impression they were eager to negotiate her release. While the price was steep — $6.2 million — and against United States law to pay in the first place, the Muellers clung to the hope that something reasonable could be worked out.

This was not entirely delusional. ISIS has a history of releasing hostages to wealthy western Europeans who pay fat ransoms.

Then last May, the White House struck the controversial swap in which five former Taliban commanders were released from the prison camp at Guantanamo Bay for, putting it generously, AWOL Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, and, regarding Kayla, everything changed.

Tom Jackson’s “The Right Stuff” blog updates throughout the week at TBO.com.

Remember back before Christmas when former Florida governor Jeb Bush declared he was exploring a run for the presidency? And how in short order Bloomberg dropped a bomb on his coming out party about the financial ties to offshore investors he might have trouble explaining?

And remember how much fun Democrats had with that? Why, Jeb was nothing more than Mini-Mitt.

Remember back before Christmas when Jeb Bush declared he was exploring a run for the presidency? And remember how almost immediately Bloomberg dropped a bomb on his coming out party about the financial ties to offshore investors he might have trouble explaining?

And remember how much fun Democrats had with that? Why, Jeb was nothing more than Mini-Mitt.

Richly reported, authoritative and sparingly written, Wood’s article debunks the notion aggressively retailed by the Obama White House that, its name notwithstanding, ISIS has nothing to do with Islam. Or, to the extent that it does, its terroristic practices, as Obama said Wednesday, “pervert[] Islam.”